Paul Singer has been fingered (love that term) as the Daddy Warbucks behind Fusion GPS’s efforts to taint candidate Donald Trump. Who is Mr. Singer? Short answer: A vulture capitalist member of the globalist elite, albeit not as well-known as many. Singer made his fortune wheeling and dealing in “distressed debt”, buying sub-par financial obligations, repackaging them, and auctioning them to the highest bidder. Can anyone say “sub-prime mortgage crisis”? Singer does in the debt market what guys like Victor Posner does in the hard asset market (Posner buys flailing corporations, strips their physical assets, auctions them off, and pink-slips every employee he can find in the process).
Despite Singer’s interests in the conservative “Washington Free Beacon”, he is better known these days as a right-wing supporter of “social justice” starting with funding for homosexual “rights” efforts. To his credit, he’s also donated to the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, an outfit that was very supportive of Ronald Reagan’s supply-side economic theories.
Paul Singer is ranked fourth on the list of billionaire contributors to political efforts during the 2016 campaign, at $2.5 billion. Preceding Singer are the #1 dollar donor, flaming leftist and environmentalist Tom Steyer; the #2 donor, Michael Bloomberg of Noo Yawk; and #3, James Simons of Renaissance Technologies, a “black box” investment hedge fund.
Paul Singer was the major donor to Marco Rubio’s 2016 Presidential campaign. We know that there is not much love between the Rubio and Trump camps.
So why would Singer have funded oppo research on candidate Trump? My theory is simple: Singer is a “progressive conservative”, a globalist and a social-justice warrior in a grey three-piece suit and wingtips. There is little that separates the thinking of the Paul Singers of this world from the Michael Bloombergs when it comes to protecting the status quo and their vested interests. Just look at some of the comments made by the (formerly) evil Koch Brothers, once considered 100% reliable conservatives, about candidate and President Trump. I would suggest that Paul Singer either sought out, or was invited to, a meeting with some DNC operatives who suggested an alliance to try to take Trump down before last November’s vote. Hell, they all had the same motives, so why not work together?
In the world of mega-money, political party affiliation is of secondary concern. One’s loyalty is to one’s personal wealth, to the ability to protect it and to continue to be able to grow it relatively unencumbered. The Democrats and the GOP represent two ways, two paths to the same goal of exploiting opportunities for personal gain. The American system’s greatest single flaw is that it allows private wealth to purchase protection in the form of “donations” to political parties and candidates, who then craft legislation and tax codes to protect that private wealth, the maggot voter public be damned.
And then suddenly candidate Donald Trump appeared. Trump represents a Third Way, one that goes down a path to populist wealth and follows neither the Democrat nor the GOP ruts. And as such, Donald Trump was, and still is, a major threat to the denizens of the Global Billionaire Village. So we find a conservative-in-name-only funding oppo research right alongside the DNC. No surprises here IMHO.
This also explains Dubya’s recent anti-Trump speech, the one made the same day that Batears issued a pronouncement that Trump “is not who we are”…. This bunch are all card-carrying NWO types, all closet George Soros Fan Club members, with no philosophical differences of any consequence. And that pesky Constitution? That US tax code? To be defended only insofar as they protect an individual’s right to accumulate and hold massive wealth, regardless of how it was obtained. Because for members of this club, the ends justify the means.
Sources (and some interesting reading, too):
— SafeSpace —